Defamation
Protecting your reputation
What is defamation?
A statement is not defamatory unless its publication has caused or is likely to cause serious harm to the reputation of the
claimant (Defamation Act 2013 section 1).
l
A libel is a written or permanent allegation, for example in a newspaper article, TV or radio broadcast, email or website posting
l
A slander is a spoken allegation.
What do you need to prove to bring a claim?
In order to bring a claim, you need to prove that:
l
That the words complained of are defamatory of you; and
l
That they have been published to someone other than you; and
l
That you are either named or otherwise identifiable from the words.
Please note that the authority of the Deputy General
Secretary to the Joint Central Committee is needed before
any work on a defamation case is undertaken at the expense
of the Federation.
Where a claim has sufficiently good merits and prospects of
success Slater & Gordon will be able to act for you under a
Conditional Fee Agreement (also known as a 'no win no fee'
agreement).
Burden of proof
You are presumed to be of good character; so it is for the
person who made the allegations to prove they are true or
that they satisfy one of the other defences.
What defences are available to a claim in
defamation?
Funding
l
The words complained of are incapable of bearing a defamatory
meaning
l
You cannot be identified from the words complained of
l
The allegations are true
l
The words complained of are “honest opinion”, in other words a
statement of opinion which indicates the basis of the opinion and
which an honest person could have held on the basis of any fact
which existed at the time the statement was made or any thing
asserted to be a fact in a privileged statement published before the
statement complained of.
l
“Absolute privilege” – public policy protects defamatory allegations
made in certain situations, for example, statements made in judicial
proceedings; fair and accurate contemporaneous reports of such
proceedings; statements made, and documents created, in the
course of a police criminal investigation
l
“Qualified privilege” – if a statement is made in accordance with a
legal, social or moral duty to a person who has a corresponding
interest in receiving it then it is protected by this defence, for
example, a complaint about a police officer made to his or her senior
officer
l
Publication on a matter of public interest – broadly responsible
journalism
l
“Innocent dissemination” – in other words, the person was not the
author, editor or publisher of the statement complained of, he took
reasonable care in relation to its publication and he did not know
that what he did caused the publication of a defamatory statement.
This defence is relevant to, for instance, Internet Service Providers or
online sellers
The Police Federation may be able to help you if you think
you have been defamed.
The Federation Fund Rules state:
“Federation funds held by the Joint Central Committee may
on such terms and conditions as may be specified by that
Committee in the circumstances of a particular case, be used
to defray legal charges incurred by a member or former
member of the Federation arising out of any step taken by
him with the prior approval of that Committee (given for the
purposes here of) in connection with an action for libel or
slander which he has brought or contemplates bringing in
respect of a statement or alleged statement which appears
to the Committee –
1.
To relate to his conduct as a member of a police force, or
2.
To disparage him in the office of constable or otherwise to cast
doubt upon his fitness to be a member of a police force.
In all cases where support is given to a member it will only be
approved by the Joint Central Committee and action shall
normally be taken through the solicitors to the Police
Federation.”
Continue overleaf ›
l
Operators of websites – this new defence in section 5 of the
Defamation Act 2013 supplements the innocent dissemination
defence and limits the circumstances in which an action for
defamation can be brought against someone who is not the
primary publisher of a defamatory statement.
Can these defences be defeated?
You can defeat the defences of honest opinion or qualified
privilege if you can show malice on the part of the publisher.
In relation to qualified privilege, this means the defendant did
not believe the words complained of were true or he
published the words recklessly without considering whether
they were true or not, or he had some other dominant
improper motive for publishing them. In relation to honest
opinion, you will have to show the defendant did not
genuinely hold the view he expressed, in other words, in
making the defamatory comment he acted dishonestly.
What can you recover if you win your claim?
If you win your defamation claim you will be able to recover
the following remedies.
Guidance for Police Federation Officials
If you are approached by a member with a possible claim for
defamation but are not clear if it warrants legal advice
always feel free to give one of our defamation team a call to
talk it through.
In all cases, act swiftly – time is always of the essence in
defamation claims.
(NB: There is only a ONE YEAR limitation period for bringing
a court action in defamation from the date of publication –
and it is very difficult to get any extension of time from the
Court.)
Try and obtain the following from the member to submit
with the completed “Form C2 – Request for Advice” which
you send to the Deputy General Secretary’s Office at Police
Federation Headquarters:
l
A copy of the publication complained of
l
A brief letter or statement explaining the factual background
l
If the publication does not name the member, then please supply an
explanation as to why the member can be identified from the words
complained of and also the names and contact details of witnesses
who read the publication and who, without prompting, identified the
member from it l
Details of the damage caused to the member by the publication
l
Copies of any other essential documents
Damages
Damages are principally intended to compensate the
claimant for the harm done to his reputation by the
publication
An injunction
What if the media are still pursuing the story?
The purpose of an injunction is to restrain the defendant
from further publishing the allegations complained of in
future. (NB: Obtaining an interim injunction in defamation is
difficult – the Court is very reluctant to interfere in a matter
which should be left to trial, and is unlikely to grant an
injunction if it appears one of the defences outlined above will
be advanced.)
In some high profile cases, there can be considerable media
interest. If so, it may be necessary to engage in some press
relations (PR) or reputation management. Slater & Gordon is
experienced in dealing with such situations so we can help
either by advising or taking on responsibility for dealing with
the media. The key points to follow are:-
Legal costs
l
Make sure only one nominated individual deals with the media
l
Decide at the outset whether communication with the media will be
over the telephone, or in press conferences or whether it will be by
way of prepared press statements. The danger with the first two is
lack of control. Press statements are the safer option l
Ensure that all comments to the media are authorised and approved
by the member l
Other than in very rare cases, do not respond to media enquiries with
“no comment”; it is preferable to prepare a press release since the
media will be ill-advised not to include it in any story they then
publish l
If it is a large story, it may be worth engaging professional PR help;
once again, Slater & Gordon can assist with this
l
Finally, always make sure you have established whether you are
speaking on or off the record. Assume that anything you say will be
used so make sure you are fully briefed and fully prepared before any
media comment or interview
The successful party usually gets an order that his costs
should be paid by the unsuccessful party.
It is important to note that one cannot include a claim for an
apology in defamation proceedings. An apology can only be
obtained through negotiations as part of a settlement. One
way in which a public apology can be made is by means of a
statement read in open Court (which can then be reported
with absolute privilege).
Alternatively, depending on where the libel appeared, one can
try and negotiate the publication of an apology in a
newspaper, or a letter of apology, or an apology posted on
an internet web site. In rare cases, one might be able to
secure an apology broadcast on TV or radio.
Contact us
If you need further assistance, in the first instance
please contact your local Joint Branch Board.
W: www.slatergordon.co.uk/policelaw
.
This factsheet is for general guidance only and should not be treated as a definitive guide
or be regarded as legal advice. If you need more details or information about the matters
referred to in this factsheet please seek formal legal advice.
Slater & Gordon is one of the UK’s leading and largest legal practices
with offices throughout England, Wales and Scotland.
Slater & Gordon (UK) LLP is authorised and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority. The
information in this factsheet was correct at the time of going to press May 2014.